A taxpayer has been unsuccessful before the Appeal Panel of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal in seeking the principal place of residence (PPR) land tax exemption in respect of a property for the 2013 land tax year.
The Commissioner had issued the taxpayer a land tax assessment on the basis that he was entitled to the PPR exemption for a residence located at Panania, NSW. However, the taxpayer objected to the assessment arguing the exemption should be applied to another property located in Randwick, NSW. The taxpayer had lived at the Randwick property for many years until September 2012, when he moved to the Panania property to allow demolition and reconstruction on the [Randwick] site. However, the builder went into liquidation in November 2011 and construction of the new residence ceased. Home warranty insurance was not paid until May 2013 and a new builder has subsequently engaged to complete the construction of the new residence in Randwick. At first instance, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal held that the Panania property was the taxpayer’s PPR and therefore the Randwick property could not be.
The Appeal Panel dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal. It concluded there was no error of law and that the Tribunal’s determination that the Panania property was the taxpayer’s PPR at the taxing date was “properly grounded in the undisputed facts which accepted the [taxpayer’s] stated intention that ultimately he would reside at the Randwick property”.
(Theophilas v Chief Comr of State Revenue [2015] NSWCATAP 39, NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Appeal Panel, Seiden PM, Renwick SM, 13 March 2015.)
[LTN 53, 19/3/15]